Literal Rule

Literal Rule

1. Advantages

   • Creates certainty in the law
     • Follows the Act strictly word for word, so it will always have the same meaning
       • DPP v Cheeseman - word passenger was taken from the dictionary so everyone will be viewed under the same definition of 'passer by'.
         • Advantage - keeps the law fair and consistent and allows lawyers and Ds to know the law and properly properly for trials
   • Respects Parliamentary Supremacy
     • Follows the exact wording Parliament used and the literal meaning of those words
       • LNER v Berriman - court stuck to the strict meaning of relaying and repairing and refused to include maintaining when it had not been specified by Parliament
         • Advantage - Parliament's job, not a judge's, to make the law due to Parliament being elected and representing society
   • Easy to use and saves time
     • Judges do not need to think about the meaning of words, just apply them as they are
       • Whitley v Chappell - judges only had to decide what entitled to vote meant and then see how that worked in the case fact; didn't need to hear complex arguments
         • Advantage - means 'swift' justice and more cases are dealt with in less time.

2. Disadvantage

   • Leads to absurd decisions
     • Follows the words of the Act strictly and may end up being restrictive
       • Whitley v Chappell - the wording 'entitled to vote' could not apply to someone who was dead. Therefore D had not literally committed the crime, even though he had stolen a vote and done what Parliament wanted to stop
         • Disadvantage - means that bad decisions will be made due to technicalities and may prevent justice in situations where D should(n't) be guilty
   • Assumes unattainable perfection in draftmanship
     • Follows the exact words of the Act as they are written, when Parliament may have made a mistake or failed to consider certain situations
       • LNER v Berriman - only 'repairing or relaying' the track entitled rail employees to have a lookout. Maintaining the track did not need a lookout despite it carrying the same risk. Probably not what Parliament wanted, but it was what their wording suggested
         • Disadvantage - Parliament's intention isn't actually fulfilled, and it leads to absurd decisions due to mistakes or omissions
   • May be hard to agree on 'literal' meanings
     • Words may have more than one meaning
       • R v Allen - marriage had two different meanings that could have been taken
         • Disadvantage - it could make it difficult to actually apply the literally rule and therefore is not really quick or easy to use